Originally assigned to: @rockerBOO, @Penaz91, @DrKJeff16 on GitHub.
Reasoning
Since #2044 has been merged, plus having #2061 as precedent, it would be nice to ensure all future colorscheme contributors to be better prepared for how we handle colorscheme tags.
I have a proposal which uses Markdown comments to avoid cluttering future PR descriptions (#2069).
Would love to know your takes on this attempt:
<!--
PLEASE make sure to read the CONTRIBUTING.md file!
https://github.com/rockerBOO/awesome-neovim/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md
-->### Repo URL:
https://github.com/...
### Checklist:
<!-- Is your plugin a colorscheme? Then uncomment this section (and remove this line).
- [ ] The plugin is a colorscheme and has been properly tagged.
-->- [ ] The plugin is specifically built for Neovim.
- [ ] The plugin is licensed.
- [ ] The lines end with a `.`. This is to conform to `awesome-list` linting and requirements.
- [ ] The title of the pull request is ```Add/Update/Remove `username/repo` ``` (notice the backticks around ``` `username/repo` ```) when adding a new plugin.
- [ ] The description doesn't mention that it's a Neovim plugin, it's obvious from the rest of the document. No mentions of the word `plugin` unless it's related to something else. No `.. for Neovim`.
- [ ] The description doesn't contain emojis.
- [ ] Neovim is spelled as `Neovim` (not `nvim`, `NeoVim` or `neovim`), Vim is spelled as `Vim` (capitalized), Lua is spelled as `Lua` (capitalized), Tree-sitter is spelled as `Tree-sitter`.
- [ ] Acronyms (`LSP`, `TS`, `YAML`, etc.) are fully capitalized.
Originally created by @DrKJeff16 on GitHub (Dec 31, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/rockerBOO/awesome-neovim/issues/2068
Originally assigned to: @rockerBOO, @Penaz91, @DrKJeff16 on GitHub.
## Reasoning
Since #2044 has been merged, plus having #2061 as precedent, it would be nice to ensure all future colorscheme contributors to be better prepared for how we handle colorscheme tags.
I have a proposal **which uses Markdown comments** to avoid cluttering future PR descriptions (#2069).
Would love to know your takes on this attempt:
```markdown
<!--
PLEASE make sure to read the CONTRIBUTING.md file!
https://github.com/rockerBOO/awesome-neovim/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
### Repo URL:
https://github.com/...
### Checklist:
<!-- Is your plugin a colorscheme? Then uncomment this section (and remove this line).
- [ ] The plugin is a colorscheme and has been properly tagged.
-->
- [ ] The plugin is specifically built for Neovim.
- [ ] The plugin is licensed.
- [ ] The lines end with a `.`. This is to conform to `awesome-list` linting and requirements.
- [ ] The title of the pull request is ```Add/Update/Remove `username/repo` ``` (notice the backticks around ``` `username/repo` ```) when adding a new plugin.
- [ ] The description doesn't mention that it's a Neovim plugin, it's obvious from the rest of the document. No mentions of the word `plugin` unless it's related to something else. No `.. for Neovim`.
- [ ] The description doesn't contain emojis.
- [ ] Neovim is spelled as `Neovim` (not `nvim`, `NeoVim` or `neovim`), Vim is spelled as `Vim` (capitalized), Lua is spelled as `Lua` (capitalized), Tree-sitter is spelled as `Tree-sitter`.
- [ ] Acronyms (`LSP`, `TS`, `YAML`, etc.) are fully capitalized.
```
I don't know if it's a good idea to make the todo list more complicated, what would be the advantages for us and the contributors having a checkbox instead of a simple comment?
<!-- gh-comment-id:3705862939 -->
@Penaz91 commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):
I don't know if it's a good idea to make the todo list more complicated, what would be the advantages for us and the contributors having a checkbox instead of a simple comment?
I don't know if it's a good idea to make the todo list more complicated, what would be the advantages for us and the contributors having a checkbox instead of a simple comment?
@Penaz91 #2061 contributed to my train of thought.
My intention is to make any future user that wants to add a colorscheme to be at least somewhat informed of how we categorize them. It's the ONLY section with custom listings, so it kinda needs more treatment.
I envision future users complaining for the lack of clarity in the PR template. Of course, they SHOULD read the CONTRIBUTING.md file first. However I'm viewing it more from a realistic angle here, and we know not everyone reads the file (even though they ought to).
Alternative
We can discard these changes I'm proposing if we want to, it's just a way for me to hopefully help if possible in this matter.
<!-- gh-comment-id:3705985039 -->
@DrKJeff16 commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):
> I don't know if it's a good idea to make the todo list more complicated, what would be the advantages for us and the contributors having a checkbox instead of a simple comment?
@Penaz91 #2061 contributed to my train of thought.
My intention is to make any future user that wants to add a colorscheme to be at least somewhat informed of how we categorize them. It's the ONLY section with custom listings, so it kinda needs more treatment.
I envision future users complaining for the lack of clarity in the PR template. Of course, they SHOULD read the `CONTRIBUTING.md` file first. However I'm viewing it more from a realistic angle here, and we know not everyone reads the file (even though they ought to).
---
## Alternative
We can discard these changes I'm proposing if we want to, it's just a way for me to hopefully help if possible in this matter.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Originally created by @DrKJeff16 on GitHub (Dec 31, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/rockerBOO/awesome-neovim/issues/2068
Originally assigned to: @rockerBOO, @Penaz91, @DrKJeff16 on GitHub.
Reasoning
Since #2044 has been merged, plus having #2061 as precedent, it would be nice to ensure all future colorscheme contributors to be better prepared for how we handle colorscheme tags.
I have a proposal which uses Markdown comments to avoid cluttering future PR descriptions (#2069).
Would love to know your takes on this attempt:
@Penaz91 commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):
I don't know if it's a good idea to make the todo list more complicated, what would be the advantages for us and the contributors having a checkbox instead of a simple comment?
@DrKJeff16 commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):
@Penaz91 #2061 contributed to my train of thought.
My intention is to make any future user that wants to add a colorscheme to be at least somewhat informed of how we categorize them. It's the ONLY section with custom listings, so it kinda needs more treatment.
I envision future users complaining for the lack of clarity in the PR template. Of course, they SHOULD read the
CONTRIBUTING.mdfile first. However I'm viewing it more from a realistic angle here, and we know not everyone reads the file (even though they ought to).Alternative
We can discard these changes I'm proposing if we want to, it's just a way for me to hopefully help if possible in this matter.